Jump to content

Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

Nextel49
 Share

Recommended Posts

itsrobert Member Level: 1x Advanced

itsrobert

Posted
Posted

Hoping the Sprint Tower closest to my home is kept and T-Moible equipment is added.  

 

I hear if the deal falls through, the only penalty T-Mobile will pay is that  Sprint customers will still be able to roam on T-Mobile.    That will be huge for rural Sprint Customers with T-Mobile's 600mhz. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

S4GRU
S4GRU

Definitely not in vain.  Sprint never would have had the number of customers and value without it to be sold.  It would have been bankruptcy.  But after all these years and effort, it kinda feels like

S4GRU
S4GRU

And what will this all mean for S4GRU?  We are in a wait and see mode before we decide how to adapt.  Until then, we will be here every day with you all, plotting our wireless destiny. Robert

S4GRU
S4GRU

Alright.  There may not be a Sprint anymore, but the same rules apply.  Just incessant complaining about the old Sprint is getting old.  People will start checking out because it just will become a co

Posted Images

Trip Member Level: 4G LTE

Trip

Posted
Posted
Just now, Arysyn said:

Thanks, Terrell. That makes more sense... I couldn't imagine the company getting rid of 85,000 sites, though still the 35,000 going away is quite alot too, the closely by sites to T-Mobile's towers.

There are an absolute boatload of sites shared by both Sprint and T-Mobile.  There are additional sites that are at adjacent locations.  I wouldn't be surprised if that number added up to 35,000.

- Trip

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
itsrobert Member Level: 1x Advanced

itsrobert

Posted
Posted

My prediction is TMobile will buy the naming rights to the Raiders new Las Vegas Stadium and call it The New T-Mobile Coliseum to go along with T-Mobile Arena they already have rights for. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigsnake49 Member Level: LTE Advanced

bigsnake49

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

I don't really think that would be a smart idea...

I think the ideal network configuration for a combined company would probably be:

  • ~20x20 NR600
  • 5x5 L700
  • 5x5 L800
  • A single 1x800 carrier
  • 20x20 L1900
  • A single U1900 carrier
  • 20x20 L2100
  • LTE/NR on 2.5 GHz

There isn't much benefit to shutting down 1x800 because not much else can be done with that 1.25 MHz FDD slice of spectrum.  Additionally, 1x800 provides far greater range than LTE or NR will ever be capable of and would be very useful to keep for edge-of-cell rural cases.  

Too many bands to be supported on the towers. RRHs would be really complicated or they would have to double them. T-Mobile has both AWS-1 and AWS-3. I think they will try to consolidate their spectrum holdings. Look out for a lot of horse trading after the merger closes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arysyn Member Level: 4G LTE

Arysyn

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, itsrobert said:

My prediction is TMobile will buy the naming rights to the Raiders new Las Vegas Stadium and call it The New T-Mobile Coliseum to go along with T-Mobile Arena they already have right for. 

This is why I think eventually they'll co-locate the combined companies to Las Vegas by building a huge stunning new headquarters there Des will get to show off in an opening video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RAvirani Member Level: LTE Advanced

RAvirani

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

Too many bands to be supported on the towers. RRHs would be really complicated or they would have to double them. T-Mobile has both AWS-1 and AWS-3. I think they will try to consolidate their spectrum holdings. Look out for a lot of horse trading after the merger closes.

Three antennas per tower easily: Sprint 800/1900/2500, T-Mobile 600/700, T-Mobile 1900/2100. RRHs can be doubled up and reused across both network. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arysyn Member Level: 4G LTE

Arysyn

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, 2fastkuztoms said:

The question is, Robert do you bougth T4GRU.com domain?

That reminds me of a good question... What will the new name of S4GRU be? I doubt it'll be T4GRU though, especially with the 5G push? T5GRU perhaps?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigsnake49 Member Level: LTE Advanced

bigsnake49

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Paynefanbro said:

In the video that John and Marcelo made together, they mentioned that Comcast is growing extremely fast despite only being an MVNO on Verizon's network. Xfinity Mobile was announced in April 2017 and by March 2018, they had 577,000 postpaid subscribers.

Not to mention Charter MVNO. I think between the two, Comcast and Charter they might cause some damage with strand and pole mounted small cells. I just might join the Charter MVNO when they offer it here if the deals are good.

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites
IamMrFamous07 Member Level: 4G WiMax

IamMrFamous07

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, derrph said:

Wait so the company is going to be called “New T-Mobile” or just T-Mobile? 

 

1 minute ago, derrph said:

Wait so the company is going to be called “New T-Mobile” or just T-Mobile? 

T-Mobile 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigsnake49 Member Level: LTE Advanced

bigsnake49

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

Three antennas per tower easily: Sprint 800/1900/2500, T-Mobile 600/700, T-Mobile 1900/2100. 

Per sector, you mean. They might run against weight limits. I expect that would be the initial configuration but they probably want to save money on rent and the more antennas/RRHs the more your rent.

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RAvirani Member Level: LTE Advanced

RAvirani

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

Per sector, you mean. They might run against weight limits. I expect that would be the initial configuration but they probably want to save money on rent and the more antennas/RRHs the more your rent.

Yes, I did mean per sector, which is not too bad. Almost all Verizon setups in Seattle use 3-4 antennas per sector and almost all AT&T setups use 2-4.

Since we are seeing 4x4 800 RRHs coming out soon, I’d guess most future deployments on 800/1900/2500 will only utilize 3 RRHs per sector. Additionally, T-Mobile heavily utilizes active antennas today (antennas with an RRU integrated), so that ought to help a lot too. I’d estimate a full joint T-Mobile and Sprint setup would only require 4-5 RRUs and 3 antennas per sector today.

If we see 2100 integrated into T-Mobile 600/700 antennas in the future, we could get all 6 bands into 2 antennas and 4 RRUs per sectors — that’s pretty manageable if you ask me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigsnake49 Member Level: LTE Advanced

bigsnake49

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, RAvirani said:

Yes, I did mean per sector, which is not too bad. Almost all Verizon setups in Seattle use 3-4 antennas per sector and almost all AT&T setups use 2-4.

Since we are seeing 4x4 800 RRHs coming out soon, I’d guess most future deployments on 800/1900/2500 will only utilize 3 RRHs per sector. Additionally, T-Mobile heavily utilizes active antennas today (antennas with an RRU integrated), so that ought to help a lot too. I’d estimate a full joint T-Mobile and Sprint setup would only require 4-5 RRUs and 3 antennas per sector today.

If we see 2100 integrated into T-Mobile 600/700 antennas in the future, we could get all 6 bands into 2 antennas and 4 RRUs per sectors — that’s pretty manageable if you ask me. 

Why can't T-mobile's 1900 be served by Sprint's 800/1900/2500? Also in certain areas Sprint has 20MHz band 25 spectrum all by itself.

The other thing that the resulting company should look at is to deploy C-RAN (Centralized RAN) so they can centralize the base station functionality into a central facility per area. Of course that would require additional fiber bandwidth but it provides many pros than cons (fault tolerance/generic hardware/UPS)

Edited by bigsnake49
Link to comment
Share on other sites
utiz4321 Member Level: 4G WiMax

utiz4321

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, SprintNYC said:

Hey let’s announce dual headquarters just to trick the DOJ that we won’t kill high paying jobs when in reality one of the reasons of this merger is to save billions on labor. 

This thing will happen unless the DOJ shot it down but it will be a win win to T-Mobile regarless because Sprint management will halt all deployments as soon this transaction is announced. Massa Son is the ultimate vulture capitalist. Having said that all the signs were there from the start. Marcelo was brought in to cut the fat and get the company ready for a merger.

Mass should have been able to buy T mobile right from the start. Sprint wasted years producing a network that was inferior to the competition. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rawvega Member Level: 4G LTE

Rawvega

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, itsrobert said:

My prediction is TMobile will buy the naming rights to the Raiders new Las Vegas Stadium and call it The New T-Mobile Coliseum to go along with T-Mobile Arena they already have rights for. 

I sort of doubt that unless the merged company eventually were to eventually relocate their combined headquarters to Las Vegas (which I personally wouldn't mind). A corporation with co-headquarters in the Kansas City and Seattle areas purchasing naming rights to a football stadium in Las Vegas doesn't necessarily make sense as both of those areas already have professional football stadiums. It would just be...odd imo. When T-mobile purchased the naming rights to T-mobile Arena in Las Vegas, Seattle didn't have an NHL team (though that likely will be changing in the next few years).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
utiz4321 Member Level: 4G WiMax

utiz4321

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jamesinclair said:

I hope the government shuts this down again

 

LOL, thats not how mergers work.

 

(laughing at the corporate line, not the messenger)

 

 

Yup we should have keep 8 wireless carriers with an average of 40 MHz of specturm each because of the job lose the mergers created. Those poor people, they never got another job again. Can you imagine how terrible that world would be? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
derrph Member Level: 4G WiMax

derrph

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, IamMrFamous07 said:

 

T-Mobile 

Thanks. I just keep seeing new tmo and just took it as “well is this the new name? It’s ugly and might as well call it Joggers instead lol” 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
danlodish345 Member Level: LTE Advanced

danlodish345

Posted
Posted
Just now, derrph said:

Thanks. I just keep seeing new tmo and just took it as “well is this the new name? It’s ugly and might as well call it Joggers instead lol” 

Well I really hope it produces some type of tangible results in terms of the actual merger. Like I want to see a network that can keep up with Verizon let alone AT&T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bigsnake49 Member Level: LTE Advanced

bigsnake49

Posted
Posted

Even with the merger, the resulting company only will have 59M postpaid customers out of 127M. The new company will still have to compete on price for a while to snitch some postpaid customers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
derrph Member Level: 4G WiMax

derrph

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, danlodish345 said:

Well I really hope it produces some type of tangible results in terms of the actual merger. Like I want to see a network that can keep up with Verizon let alone AT&T.

Hell it better. That I can agree on. 

 

3 minutes ago, bigsnake49 said:

Even with the merger, the resulting company only will have 59M postpaid customers out of 127M. The new company will still have to compete on price for a while to snitch some postpaid customers.

Wow! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
danlodish345 Member Level: LTE Advanced

danlodish345

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, derrph said:

Hell it better. That I can agree on. 

 

Wow! 

It definitely should. Because I want to have a carrier that's good on price but also good on the network. But obviously in some cases we can't have both. So I really hope the doj And FCC scrutinize this very carefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • iansltx
      T-Mobile to acquire UScellular

      By iansltx · Posted

      A heavy n41 overlay as an acquisition condition would be a win for customers, and eventually a win for T-Mobile as that might be enough to preclude VZW/AT&T adding C-Band for FWA due to spreading the market too thinly (which means T-Mobile would just have local WISPs/wireline ISPs as competition). USCC spacing (which is likely for contiguous 700 MHz LTE coverage in rural areas) isn't going to be enough for contiguous n41 anyway, and I doubt they'll densify enough to get there.
    • iansltx
      Dish Network/Boost Mobile cell/5G buildout thread

      By iansltx · Posted

      Boost Infinite with a rainbow SIM (you can get it SIM-only) is the cheapest way, at $25/mo, to my knowledge; the cheaper Boost Mobile plans don't run on Dish native. Check Phonescoop for n70 support on a given phone; the Moto G 5G from last year may be the cheapest unlocked phone with n70 though data speeds aren't as good as something with an X70 or better modem.
    • iansltx
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By iansltx · Posted

      Continuing the USCC discussion, if T-Mobile does a full equipment swap at all of USCC's sites, which they probably will for vendor consistency, and if they include 2.5 on all of those sites, which they probably will as they definitely have economies of scale on the base stations, that'll represent a massive capacity increase in those areas over what USCC had, and maybe a coverage increase since n71 will get deployed everywhere and B71 will get deployed any time T-Mobile has at least 25x25, and maybe where they have 20x20. Assuming this deal goes through (I'm betting it does), I figure I'll see contiguous coverage in the area of southern IL where I was attempting to roam on USCC the last time I was there, though it might be late next year before that switchover happens.
    • cooltech6597
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By cooltech6597 · Posted

      Forgot to post this, but a few weeks ago I got to visit these small cells myself! They're spread around Grant park and the surrounding areas, but unfortunately none of the mmwave cells made it outside of the parks along the lake into the rest of downtown. I did spot some n41 small cells around downtown, but they seemed to be older deployments limited to 100mhz and performed poorly.    
    • JossMan
      Dish Network/Boost Mobile cell/5G buildout thread

      By JossMan · Posted

      What is the cheapest way to try Dish's wireless network?  Over the past year I've seen them add their equipment to just about every cell site here, I'm assuming just go through Boost's website?  What phones are Dish native?  

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...